list_data_providers

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool shows contract status, segments, platforms, and contact info, but does not mention whether it is read-only, any authentication requirements, data freshness, or pagination.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action and examples, and contains no redundant information. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list tool with one optional enum parameter, the description covers purpose and output fields well. It could mention that the output is a list or note any pagination limits, but given the lack of complexity, it is largely complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The single optional parameter (status) is self-explanatory from its enum values, but schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the parameter or how it filters results. The description fails to add value beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses the specific verb 'List' and resource 'contracted third-party data providers', citing concrete examples (Oracle Data Cloud, Acxiom, Experian). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_measurement_partners or list_first_party_audiences.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this tool is for viewing third-party provider contracts, but it does not explicitly state when to use it vs. alternatives like list_measurement_partners or list_third_party_audience_layers. No exclusions or conditions are provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.